Climate Science Glossary

Term Lookup

Settings

Use the controls in the far right panel to increase or decrease the number of terms automatically displayed (or to completely turn that feature off).

Term Lookup

Term:

Settings

Beginner Intermediate Advanced No DefinitionsDefinition Life:

All IPCC definitions taken from Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Annex I, Glossary, pp. 941-954. Cambridge University Press.

China must exploit its shale gas

If the Senate confirms the nomination of the M.I.T. scientist Ernest J. Moniz as the next energy secretary, as expected, he must use his new position to consider the energy situation not only in the United States, but in China as well.

EPA will delay rule limiting carbon emissions

The Environmental Protection Agency said Friday that it would delay issuance of a new rule limiting emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from new power plants after the electric power industry objected on legal and technical grounds.

Hearing on EPA nominee Gina McCarthy

Even the Republicans who are the most critical of the Environmental Protection Agency had few questions Thursday about whether Gina McCarthy, President Barack Obama’s pick to be the nation’s top clean air and water watchdog, has the qualifications for the job.

Letting nature take its course?

Is sustainability still possible? Yes. Is it still probable? No. With bold action today, tomorrow, and in years to come, we could succeed in creating a sustainable and prosperous society. But what does bold action actually mean?

First and foremost, we have to start living within Earth’s boundaries: stop changing the climate, wiping out biodiversity, disrupting the phosphorous and nitrogen cycles, and so on. And to do that we’ll need to live a one-planet lifestyle.

Russia skips hybrids

Gazprom, the state-owned energy monopoly better known for heating houses and powering factories in Europe, is making a bet that natural gas cars are an alluring market for future growth, at home in Russia and in other European countries that have bought its gas. All the ingredients are in place for adoption of natural gas vehicles in Russia, the world’s second-largest gas producer after the United States, with economic and environmental payoffs.

The state of nuclear power in US

Think the planet isn't warming?

As The Economist piece itself pointed out, this wasn’t an argument that “global warming has ‘stopped.‘” The past two decades have been the hottest in recorded history; of the nine hottest years on record, eight have come since 2000. The question, though, is why the year-on-year/decade-on-decade increase appears to have been somewhat less in the past 10 to 15 years, given the ongoing increase in atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations.

Why Jim Hansen stopped being a government scientist

Why did James Hansen retire on April 2 after 32 years as director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies? As he told the enterprising students of Columbia University’s Sustainability Media Lab who captured him in the following video, “I want to devote full time to trying to help the public understand the urgency of addressing climate change.”

Wild weather can send greenhouse gases spiraling

Climate change has a disconcerting tendency to amplify itself through feedback effects. Melting sea ice exposes dark water, allowing the ocean to soak up more heat. Arctic warming speeds the release of carbon dioxide from permafrost. And, as researchers discussed at a meeting last week in Seefeld, Austria, climate extremes — heatwaves, droughts and storms — can hamper plant growth, weakening a major buffer against the rise of CO< in the atmosphere.

chriskoz@1, I agree absolutely, in a sense. Not to be a nitpicker, but not all scientists need to become activists. In my view, we are engaged in a war, and a global mobilization at least on the scale of 1939-1945 is needed. The "enemy" is Us and our relation to Nature. If we wait for the Pearl Harbor moment to wake up and get involved, we may wait forever. Nature's predominant strategy in this "war game" may well be a version of the Chinese(?) "Death by a 1000 little cuts." It is not a two-, three-, or four-front war but a multi-multifront war. One person can only fight well on one front. But we all need to engage where we can fight best. We still need more science to learn what we do not yet know, to make what may be crucial new discoveries. The general picture, however, is rather clear.

When we say "all of us," it is of course a generalization. "All of us" did not participate in the agricultural revolution thousands of years ago, which was accomplished over many centuries. There are still some Stone-Age hunter-gather humans on the planet. "All of us" did not participate in the industrial revolution a few centuries ago, which was acoomplished over many decades. There are still many pre-industrial agricultural humans on the planet. In the same way, I think not "all of us" need now participate in the--what shall we call it?--the sustainable-responsible revolution, which must be accomplished over a few years. We need just a sufficiently large percentage of "all of us."

I believe the total problem is too large and complex for me or you (or anybody) to understand. It then follows that the total problem, if we will solve it, can be fully understood only by the collective intelligence of mankind. Just how this collective intelligence can form and function, I don't know. But I have been thinking about it for more than forty years and have started to work on it more actively very recently. I you want to know more about this aspect, contact me personally.

NOTE TO MODERATOR: Please delete this comment if you consider it too much off-topic. I won't be offended.

Gavin Schmidt said once on realclimate: "If you want to save the planet, study engineering, not climate science". Presumably, he meant "whatever is to discover about AGW and the reason why we want to stop it, has been discovered and settled. Now, solutions are far more urgent than further details"

Gavin, who's been working with Jim, has certainly good perspective. Acitivism alone will not solve the problem. This is just the first step that will become the majority, including all policy makers are aware. Next is to implement the engineering solutions.

I'm interested what you have to say. Mods, please give us the e-mail contact.Thanks.

Chris, I'm afraid it's more complicated. In truth, a lot of engineering solutions already exist that, if used concurrently, could limit the extent of the accidental geo-engineering experiment we're witnessing. The problem is political and economic: how to implement these solutions against the already existing ones in which powerful actors have a vested interest. Even the low hanging fruits of conservation and efficiency will be opposed in places like the US or Canada, where people have enjoyed care free energy use forgenerations.

The only true engineering problem that remains is that of energy storage and distribution.

00

You need to be logged in to post a comment. Login via the left margin or if you're new, register here.